Earlier this week, the Canadian taxpayer found out that they were supporting, with their hard-earned money, an organization that wouldn’t call the deadliest terror attack in human history “terrorism.”

Americans found out about it, too, and they were pretty unhappy — especially since we’re approaching the 25th anniversary of the attacks and our neighbors to the north were telling reporters with their national broadcaster that 9/11 was a situation where “hijackings led to passenger jet crashes.”

Now, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is reversing course and calling terror attacks “terrorism.” All it took was international outrage and the United States ambassador to Canada saying the language “significantly endangers our efforts to establish and harmonize a shared national and economic security partnership.”

The whole to-do began when a memo from Basem Boshra, the “Senior Director of Journalistic Standards and Public Trust” was reported by a columnist in the Toronto Sun.

(I will to put quotation marks around Boshra’s title because it’s about as true as my self-appointed title as “Starting Quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles,” except Boshra apparently takes it seriously and receives money for it.)

In it, he described the CBC’s standards regarding 9/11 reporting.

“Do not refer to the Sept. 11 attacks as terrorist attacks,” he wrote, apparently in bold italics. Instead, reporters were supposed to say that “[t]he hijackings led to passenger jet crashes.”

“CBC’s longstanding language guidance regarding the terms ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorism’ is a preference for the use of these words with attribution, a practice shared by many of the world’s top journalistic organizations,” said CBC News spokeswoman Kerry Kelly.

“Our general manager and editor in chief has written publicly in the past on the subject.”

Indeed they had — after the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel, again not a good sign:

Attribution of the word “terrorist” has been our policy for decades — mirrored by other news organizations such as the BBC, AP, AFP and Reuters, among many others. Our focus is to report the facts of such atrocities with accuracy, clarity and detail; to convey the scale and scope of violent acts wherever they occur; to quote the people affected, and to convey the views of officials and experts on these events. We bear witness. But CBC News does not itself designate specific groups as terrorists, or specific acts as terrorism, regardless of the region or the events, because these words are so loaded with meaning, politics and emotion that they can end up being impediments to our journalism. 

The problem is that this policy isn’t really “mirrored” by those organizations, since it took me all of three minutes to find The Associated Press, the BBC, and The New York Times — three of the organizations mentioned either in the 2023 post or in response to the 9/11 memo controversy — using the word “terrorist attacks” in the first paragraph of a 9/11-related story. So that’s clearly bogus.

And at this point, even U.S. ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra was outraged, as was FBI Director Kash Patel:

Just this year, @FBI has been instrumental in or directly responsible for multiple disruptions of significant terrorist and violent criminal organizations operating within Canada. Failure to recognize and confront radical and terrorist ideologies significantly endangers our… https://t.co/mTeyUfStgv

— Ambassador Pete Hoekstra (@USAmbCanada) August 28, 2026

So, on Friday, Boshra backtracked, insisting that the memo — which explicitly said in bold italics to not refer to the 9/11 terror attacks as terror attacks — was “published and amplified by a number of outlets without full context or explanation” and “has caused significant concern, anger and hurt for many people who believe CBC News seeks to minimize or obscure the horror of that day and who was behind it.”

“CBC’s reporting on terrorism, wherever it occurs, has always been guided by the principle of attribution, and like other major news organizations, it has been our practice for decades. The reason for the extreme care around the use of the words ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorism’ was detailed in this earlier editor’s blog,” he said, linking to the 2023 Israel-Hamas piece.

But to be clear, CBC News has never said what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, was not terrorism, as some commentators have stated in recent days. We have reported fully and accurately on the reasons and motivations for those attacks as determined by police, governments and an independent commission. We’ve just made sure to do it with attribution.

Clarity and understanding are at the heart of our journalism. The leaked excerpt without context or explanation has raised more questions for the public that we must now answer.

After reviewing our current language guidance, we have decided to adjust it to clarify that direct attribution is not required for describing the historic events of 9/11 as terrorism.

So, there was never any guidance to not refer to the 9/11 attacks as terrorism, but CBC wants to engender “clarity and understanding,” so it has adjusted the guidance that specifically said to not call the 9/11 attacks terrorism except in attributions.

Oh, and just to confuse matters more, Boshra said in closing that “we will continue to follow the journalistically sound practice of attributing causes and motivations to officials and experts.” Translation: He’s covering his posterior this time, but don’t expect him to do so in the future.

Many, many years ago, the CBC’s last truly great show, “The Kids in the Hall,” ran a hilarious (if ribald) sketch called “Screw You, Taxpayer,” in which they started out with a deliberately offensive premise and then broke the fourth wall, with cast member Mark McKinney saying that they were just wasting your money.

This included one of the other cast members, Scott Thompson, stating that he would “like to take a little bit of our national network airtime to advocate” that he be allowed to perform lewd acts “in public buildings.”

“Whoa! What a viewpoint!” McKinney responded. “And you know what? I bet it’s not yours — but you just paid to hear it!”

That’s only funny when it’s a sketch comedy show.

When it’s a terrorist attack that left nearly 3,000 innocent people dead being referred to as a situation where “hijackings led to passenger jet crashes,” not so much. And Boshra made it clear that you’ll be hearing this propagandized language again, once the storm blows over and the outrage is milder. Canadians who care about truth — whether they’re conservatives or liberals — need to defund this outrage to journalism before the CBC is allowed to resume this nonsense.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Canadian Nat’l Broadcaster Caves to Outrage, Will Refer to 9/11 as ‘Terrorist Attacks’ After Insane Internal Memo Leaked appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The man charged with stealing an American flag from a Minnesota medical office, dragging it behind his car, and coming back to shred it is a Somali citizen who was born in Uganda and came to the United States as a refugee, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed to Libs of TikTok.

The suspect is 24-year-old Mahamud Hassan Mahamed, who has been booked on a misdemeanor tab charge of fourth-degree damage to property after the Wednesday incidents.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Mahamed ripped the flag down in the morning, attached it to his vehicle, and dragged it until bystanders chased him off and recovered it.

Mahamed returned that afternoon and shredded it.

SCOOP

The man caught in Minnesota destroying an American Flag is a Somali citizen who was born in Uganda and came to the U.S. as a refugee, DHS confirmed to me.

DENATURALIZE AND DEPORT https://t.co/RnXSCgLqFV

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) August 30, 2026

Crime Watch Minneapolis obtained videos of the incident and posted them on X.

WATCH:

Submitted from vibrant Richfield Minnesota this morning:
“This person just tried to steal our America flag that was hanging on the pole outside of our building located at York Ave and 66th Street in Edina. He pulled the flag down and then stuck it in the back of his trunk and was… pic.twitter.com/xr4YHUiJnF

— CrimeWatchMpls (@CrimeWatchMpls) August 26, 2026

Jail records showed he was held on $2,000 cash bail or $200 conditional release.

It appears Mahamed has since been released and is due back in court in December.

Mahamed already had a live felony file for threats of violence from an April incident at his apartment building. A hearing in that case was scheduled for the same Wednesday as the flag attack.

Minnesota records list at least five prior traffic convictions.

Earlier this month, he was booked into Hennepin County Jail on a probable-cause DWI and released pending a formal complaint.

The flag case itself was charged only as a misdemeanor despite the second trip to destroy the flag after witnesses had already stopped him.

The post DHS Confirms Minnesota Flag-Dragging Vandal Is a Somali Citizen Who Entered as a ‘Refugee’ (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A Guatemalan illegal alien released into the United States under the Biden regime has been charged with manslaughter after allegedly striking a mother and her two children in a New Jersey grocery-store parking lot, killing her 9-month-old baby boy.

The Department of Homeland Security confirmed to LibsofTikTok that 20-year-old Maria CobonGuzman is a Guatemalan national who illegally entered the United States in 2023 and was released into the country by the Biden administration.

DHS said CobonGuzman received a final order of removal just one month before the fatal crash.

She was still in the United States.

This is the deadly legacy of Joe Biden’s open-border disaster: Millions of illegal aliens were allowed into American communities while immigration cases crawled through a broken system.

On Friday, August 28, at approximately 11:55 a.m., Jackson Township police responded to a report of pedestrians being struck outside the NPGS grocery store on West County Line Road.

According to the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office, CobonGuzman was driving a Ford Fusion through the parking lot when she allegedly struck a mother pushing a carriage carrying her 5-year-old daughter and 9-month-old son.

All three victims were rushed to Jersey Shore University Medical Center in Neptune.

The baby boy was pronounced dead at the hospital. His mother and 5-year-old sister remained hospitalized in stable condition.

Local Jewish news outlets identified the baby as Yitzchok Rosenberg. The Lakewood Scoop reported that federal immigration authorities have now lodged detainers against both women charged in connection with the tragedy.

Investigators determined that CobonGuzman had never possessed a valid driver’s license, not in New Jersey and not in any other state.

CobonGuzman was charged with:

• Manslaughter
• Operating a motor vehicle without ever having possessed or been issued a valid driver’s license while involved in a fatal crash
• Two counts of assault by auto

A second woman, 22-year-old Ariadna Lazaro-Flores of Toms River, was charged with knowingly engaging in conduct creating a substantial risk of death to another.

Investigators allege Lazaro-Flores knew CobonGuzman had never possessed a driver’s license but allowed her to operate the vehicle anyway.

DHS confirmed that Lazaro-Flores is also an illegal alien. She is a Mexican national who illegally entered the United States in 2023.

Both women were taken into custody and transported to the Ocean County Jail, where they were being held pending detention hearings.

EXCLUSIVE

The driver who kiIIed a 9-month-old baby in NJ while driving without a license is an ILLEGAL ALIEN from Guatemala, DHS confirmed to us.

She was RELEASED into our country by the Biden admin in 2023. She received a FINAL ORDER OF REMOVAL just one month ago.

Maria… pic.twitter.com/cvVIYgKzFG

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) August 30, 2026

The Gateway Pundit has repeatedly reported on the deadly consequences of illegal aliens operating vehicles on American roads.

In July, The Gateway Pundit reported that an illegal alien who had already been deported three times was charged in a North Carolina crash that killed 6-year-old Calli Toler and injured her mother and another child.

The Gateway Pundit also reported on an unlicensed illegal-alien semi-truck driver accused of running a red light in Indiana and causing a three-vehicle crash that badly injured a woman and her 3-year-old grandchild.

Now another American family is shattered.

A baby is dead. A mother and her young daughter are hospitalized. And the woman accused of causing the tragedy was allegedly released into America by the Biden administration, remained here after receiving a final removal order, and had never legally been permitted to drive.

The investigation remains ongoing. The charges are allegations, and both defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.

The post HORROR: Biden-Released Illegal Alien Who Never Had a Driver’s License Charged With Manslaughter After Striking New Jersey Mother and Children — Killing 9-Month-Old Baby appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Governor Kathy Hochul has announced that New York will not recognize President Donald Trump’s order renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America, calling the move “absurd” and a “deflection” from grocery bills and energy costs.

Trump responded by declaring that Hochul is “for Canada” and “doesn’t care about New York.”

On Thursday afternoon, Trump signed an executive order directing the Interior Department and the U.S. Board on Geographic Names to update the Geographic Names Information System so federal maps and documents use “Lake America,” effective immediately.

The change applies only to federal usage. This means that the order does not bind Canada, New York state agencies, or international mapmakers to using the new name.

The move comes amid a trade fight with Canada after talks broke down and the Trump administration imposed heavy new tariffs.

Hochul responded to the news in a post on X, writing that “New York won’t be calling it that.”

New York won’t be calling it that. https://t.co/FJQonEk8tI

— Governor Kathy Hochul (@GovKathyHochul) August 27, 2026

In an NY1 interview, she went further, saying, “I’m speechless. It is so patently absurd. Shame on them for deflecting from the real needs that Americans are feeling that we have here in New York. The high cost of energy, prescription drugs, utility bills, groceries. And this is what the president spends his time on? Renaming a lake that was named after our Indigenous peoples. Shame on you.”

Trump responded on Truth Social, writing that, “Governor Kathy Hochul is for Canada, a Country that has been ripping off New York State for years, especially under her Administration, instead of the good ‘ol U.S.A. Can you imagine her saying that she won’t respect or acknowledge LAKE AMERICA. That’s why the Dumocrats are so bad for our Country. Vote for Bruce Blakeman for Governor of New York. He has my Complete and Total Endorsement, and will never let you down! President DJT”

About half the lake’s surface sits in Canada and the rest along New York’s northern shore.

Other governors, including Wisconsin’s Tony Evers and Vermont’s Phil Scott, have also criticized the order.

Canadian officials also said they would not use the new name.

The post Trump Says Hochul ‘Doesn’t Care About New York’ and is ‘For Canada’ After She Declares New York Will Not Recognize Lake America Rename appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Washington legal establishment has dealt President Trump’s senior adviser Peter Navarro another blow, but Navarro says the constitutional battle is far from over.

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Friday denied Navarro’s petition for rehearing en banc, leaving intact a three-judge panel’s decision upholding his criminal contempt-of-Congress conviction.

The court’s terse, one-page order revealed that not a single judge requested a vote on whether the full court should reconsider the case. The court denied Navarro’s petition without further explanation while granting motions to file supporting amicus briefs.

The ruling now clears the way for Navarro to petition the United States Supreme Court.

Navarro issued a blistering response following the decision:

“This case was always headed to the Supreme Court. Deep Blue D.C. Circuit’s denial simply clears the runway. The issue is bigger than me: whether a White House adviser — Republican or Democrat — can be prosecuted and imprisoned for acting on a good-faith belief that a President invoked executive privilege, while being forbidden from presenting that belief to the jury. That is a separation-of-powers question the Supreme Court will now have a chance to answer.”

This case was always headed to the Supreme Court. Deep Blue D.C. Circuit’s denial simply clears the runway.
The issue is bigger than me: whether a White House adviser — Republican or Democrat — can be prosecuted and imprisoned for acting on a good-faith belief that a President… https://t.co/03TGzb9N5a

— Peter Navarro (@RealPNavarro) August 28, 2026

Navarro’s attorneys have argued that the government should have been required to prove that he knew his refusal to comply was unlawful, or that he acted with an improper purpose, not merely that his noncompliance was intentional.

They also maintain that Navarro’s good-faith understanding of President Trump’s executive-privilege instruction should have been presented to the jury. The court rejected Navarro’s request for full-court review on August 28.

Navarro was convicted in September 2023 on two counts of criminal contempt after refusing to produce documents and appear for testimony before Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney’s partisan January 6 Committee.

Navarro maintained that President Trump had directed him to protect executive privilege. Yet Obama-appointed District Judge Amit Mehta barred Navarro from presenting his good-faith executive-privilege belief as a defense to the jury.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Mehta sentenced Navarro to four months in federal prison and ordered him to pay a $9,500 fine.

Before sentencing, Navarro explained the impossible position in which he had been placed:

“When I received that congressional subpoena, the second, I had an honest belief that the privilege had been invoked, and I was torn. Nobody in my position should be put in conflict between the legislative branch and the executive branch.”

Navarro also condemned a process in which the government was permitted to prosecute him while preventing him from explaining his central defense to the jury.

The D.C. Circuit nevertheless affirmed his conviction in July. The three-judge panel concluded that only the president or an authorized representative can invoke executive privilege and upheld Mehta’s finding that no sufficiently formal invocation had been established for the specific January 6 Committee subpoena.

The panel further ruled that even a proper privilege claim would not have justified Navarro’s complete refusal to appear or produce materials, particularly information involving his public statements and writings.

The case took an extraordinary turn after President Trump returned to office.

Trump’s Justice Department informed the appeals court that it was no longer taking the Biden administration’s position in the case and withdrew its brief defending Navarro’s conviction. The DOJ, however, did not file a new brief or formally move to dismiss the appeal.

The D.C. Circuit then declared that the government had withdrawn from further participation and proceeded to hear Navarro’s appeal with Navarro standing alone.

Despite the federal government no longer defending the Biden-era prosecution, the court upheld the conviction anyway.

The Gateway Pundit has extensively documented the campaign against Navarro. In 2025, the Justice Department dropped a separate Biden-era lawsuit accusing him of improperly retaining presidential records.

That case was tainted by internal communications showing anti-Trump FBI officials discussing, and apparently celebrating, Navarro’s indictment.

Navarro has already served every day of his four-month sentence. But the constitutional danger created by his prosecution remains.

If presidential advisers can be imprisoned for honoring what they sincerely understand to be an executive-privilege instruction—and then be forbidden from explaining that understanding to a jury—future advisers from either political party could face the same trap.

The prison sentence has been served. The constitutional battle is only beginning.

Navarro is now taking that battle to the Supreme Court.

The post D.C. Circuit DENIES Peter Navarro’s Bid for Full-Court Rehearing — Trump Adviser Says “Deep Blue” Court Just Cleared Runway to SCOTUS appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.